When the quality of the electrons is questionable, you never know what the end result will be. Those miles and miles of wire from the plant, I am sure the electrons are exhausted by the time they reach the house.
Course, that would require a DC bias. At 1 or 2 mm/sec, it would take years.
I recently got a request from amazon to answer a question about a power outlet strip. In looking through the user manual, it says "don't plug it it less than 30 feet from the main CB panel.
Huh?? Really? is that a transient issue, or a bolted fault current issue??
Weird..
jn
I would think that having the ability to reduce hf/emi would be a nice attribute to have in a wire. Certain microphone cables seem to be able to do that.
Not that it has anything to do with audio, lol.
Not that it has anything to do with audio, lol.
It's a wide open market for a spin replenisher, available in up and down versions.
It MAY have a GFI which looks for N/G jumpers. I know from experience that a 3 foot run is not enough to avoid false-tripping.
I put it to the jury, M'lud, that the effectively non-existent practice of double-blind ABX testing of hifi interconnects provides incontestable proof that magic audiophool products should be found guilty on the count of expectation bias.
Not guilty. Lack of evidence only provides incontestable proof that there is a lack of evidence.
Is there an ABX switcher gizmo thing for DBT'ing cables / amps / DACs etc at home? One that runs on Bluetooth to do the switching with the statistical software running on an app would make it easy.
And we know that now for decades (and should have known before) - in audio forums because you were willing to explain again and again despite all the negative reactions - but still some people are adamant that the exchange of mains cables can not lead to audible differences.
In the RF world we worry about very low level non-linear distortion as Passive Intermodulation distortion (PIM)
Practical measured levels are -160 dBc (dB relative to carrier power)
Nobody claim to have found a benefit of exotic crystal structures. Real world problems come from ferrous material and oxides at contact surfaces
Practical measured levels are -160 dBc (dB relative to carrier power)
Nobody claim to have found a benefit of exotic crystal structures. Real world problems come from ferrous material and oxides at contact surfaces
@kazap: No such ABX box, and if there were a reliable one it would be expensive. Tried an ebay relay volume control from China. Sounded okay for awhile, but eventually it the contacts wore and it was distorting the sound a little. Replace it with a $15 Alps pot and the sound got cleaner. Replaced the Alps with a Goldpoint attenuator and it got a little cleaner yet.
At some previous time I estimated that a dac, HPA, and headphones of the caliber we were using for listening tests here would probably cost around $10k per seat if used for software based listening tests. It included a modified Pass HPA-1, Audeze LCD-X headphones, and a custom AK4499 dac. In addition, a computer would be needed, software developed, probably shipping crates made for the system, etc. If for example we wanted to test 10 subjects at time, plus spend time training them to get comfortable with testing, and particularly if in another city, we might need a few people to travel with the equipment, set it up, train test subjects, etc., need to pay for people's time and travel expenses, shipping costs for the equipment, etc. Simply not practical. OTOH, I have invited people to come here if they are interested. None ever have.
At some previous time I estimated that a dac, HPA, and headphones of the caliber we were using for listening tests here would probably cost around $10k per seat if used for software based listening tests. It included a modified Pass HPA-1, Audeze LCD-X headphones, and a custom AK4499 dac. In addition, a computer would be needed, software developed, probably shipping crates made for the system, etc. If for example we wanted to test 10 subjects at time, plus spend time training them to get comfortable with testing, and particularly if in another city, we might need a few people to travel with the equipment, set it up, train test subjects, etc., need to pay for people's time and travel expenses, shipping costs for the equipment, etc. Simply not practical. OTOH, I have invited people to come here if they are interested. None ever have.
Last edited:
True if measuring for HD or IMD. Not so true if measuring for other audible effects. Some references to published information were posted in the prior thread about where to obtain OCC wire.
If there was really this night and day difference with interconnects, you could safely bet that every 'high-end' cable manufacturer would be falling over themselves to provide results of such testing. They do not, because they do not...
Why 'night and day?' Why can't 'slightly audible' be enough if anyone cares about such things?
Agreed. If properly conducted testing ever shows this to be true to a statistically verifiable level, I'll be the first to sit up and take notice. Until then it's snake oil and expectation bias. No more. No less.
Don't know why such a strong and final sounding judgement is required now. I have decided to defer judgement on some things that aren't fully understood yet.
Daniel Kaneman, the Nobel winning psychologist, one described the human mind as, "a machine for jumping to conclusions." https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/02... Kahneman's new,us astray—in predictable ways.
This argument is unfortunately supposition. It might be right. It might be wrong. The only interesting thing is why you bother. If customers want to spend thier legal money on a product we are skeptical about so what?
At a certain level of system, “slightly audible” improvements are all that’s left, and I still find it thrilling to tweak the system to get them!
Here's a weird ABX report:
https://www.dagogo.com/audio-by-van-alstine-abx-comparator-review-part-1-audio-store-wiring/2/
One would presume that in a level matched case of ABX comparison the difference between amps would show itself just as each component and speaker had. They did not, and this caused somewhat of a crisis
I conducted a level matched comparison between the Innamorata, a solid state design, and the VAC Phi 200, a venerable and self proclaimed gorgeous sounding tube amp using KT-88 tubes, again, I could discern no difference between them!
The weirdest thing
I switched the interconnects on the amps and repeated the testing. Result; 6 out of 8 for a score of 75%. Finally, I put in the most recently arrived interconnect, the TEO Audio Liquid Silver Splash, in place of the Morrow Audio. Now I would be comparing two extremely fine cables which theoretically, based on listening to them individually in non-level matched systems, would perform more closely to each other than different. Once again, the result of the Trial was a perfect 8 out of 8, 100%. Remember, this was in the blind testing mode! In some respects these were the easiest of all trials, as I found the sonic characteristics readily discernible! Sorry, cable naysayers.
https://www.dagogo.com/audio-by-van-alstine-abx-comparator-review-part-1-audio-store-wiring/2/
One would presume that in a level matched case of ABX comparison the difference between amps would show itself just as each component and speaker had. They did not, and this caused somewhat of a crisis
I conducted a level matched comparison between the Innamorata, a solid state design, and the VAC Phi 200, a venerable and self proclaimed gorgeous sounding tube amp using KT-88 tubes, again, I could discern no difference between them!
The weirdest thing
I switched the interconnects on the amps and repeated the testing. Result; 6 out of 8 for a score of 75%. Finally, I put in the most recently arrived interconnect, the TEO Audio Liquid Silver Splash, in place of the Morrow Audio. Now I would be comparing two extremely fine cables which theoretically, based on listening to them individually in non-level matched systems, would perform more closely to each other than different. Once again, the result of the Trial was a perfect 8 out of 8, 100%. Remember, this was in the blind testing mode! In some respects these were the easiest of all trials, as I found the sonic characteristics readily discernible! Sorry, cable naysayers.
Not the case - in metals all the mobile charge carriers see each other's charge and move in concert, so scattering centres only contribute to Johnson noise, not shot noise. I think that's what you are worrying about.
Whenever you have a potential barrier that the individual charge carriers have to overcome individually, then shot-noise is present due to the discrete packets of charge moving over the barrier one-by-one (leading to random statistics). For instance in pn-junctions.
Metals, even with grain boundaries, don't have potential barriers high enough to interfere with concerted flow - this is really just another aspect of Ohm's law (that conduction in metals is linear).
Question about charge carriers and noise: If charge carriers move according the electrical signal to then interact with grain boundaries, then is the sort-of excess noise due to the signal amount to signal-modulated noise (noise floor modulation as seen on an FFT)?
Last edited: